Masteron vs. Proviron; Testosterone Only Cycles; Hygetropin HGH

Masteron vs. Proviron

Q: What is the difference between Proviron and Masteron? I heard they are both DHT derivates and one was really just an oral form of the other. Could I use Proviron instead of Masteron for contest prep? I lost my source for BD Mastabol.

A: Proviron (oral 1-methyl-dihydrotestosterone) and Masteron (an injectable form of 2-methyl-dihydrotestosterne) are indeed structurally very similar. Both are DHT hormones with a minor modification (methylation) on each. This similarity, however, doesn’t carry over extremely closely when it comes to function. Both steroids are DHT derivatives, yes, and because of this there is no estrogen conversion possible with either drug. They lack a structural trait necessary for their conversion to estrogen. This characteristic may also allow both steroids to offer some level of anti-estrogenic activity, as the non-aromatizable steroid may compete with other aromatizable steroids (like your own endogenous testosterone) for binding to the aromatase enzyme. This should lower estrogen levels and heighten the ratio of relative androgenic to estrogenic activity in the body. As such, both steroids could be used to some extent for cutting or contest preparations. The main value in this regard is that both may help, instead of hinder, the visible retention of fat and subcutaneous water. With less water retained, muscle definition can increase provided body fat is low enough. But this is about where the functional similarities between the two agents end.

The main difference between Proviron and Masteron is their relative level of anabolic activity in skeletal muscle. Both steroids are capable of attaching to and activating the androgen receptor in muscle tissue. As such, both are theoretically capable of supporting muscle growth. But there is one major problem with Proviron. Like the base steroid dihydrotestosterone, Proviron has a high affinity for the 3-alpha hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (3HSD) enzyme. Why is this important? It is important because 3HSD produces a weaker steroid by removing the highly important 3-keto group on the active steroid molecule. It this case it produces what are known as weak steroid “diols”. 3HSD is present in high amounts in muscle tissue, and represents a sort of blocking wall for the steroid to get through before it is able to find its corresponding receptor in the cytosol of the cell. Proviron and DHT will be actively looking for 3HSD if you will, and as a result very little will find the receptor before being converted to weakly active steroids. This is why people do not gain a lot of muscle mass while taking DHT or Proviron. The 1-methlation may result in improving the oral bioavailability of Proviron, hence the fact that it is an oral drug, but it doesn’t do much to protect it from 3HSD.

Masteron contains a 2-methylated derivative of DHT. Unlike the 1-methylation of Proviron, this alteration doesn’t effectively protect the steroid during oral dosing. This is why we only see Masteron as an injectable medication. However, shifting the methyl group from the 1 to the 2 position on the steroid backbone very effectively prevents conversion by 3HSD. As a result, the steroid is well equipped to enter the cell and break through the defensive line of 3HSD enzymes. It will reach the cytosolic androgen receptor in high concentrations, and because of this may impart a measurable tissue-building effect. So the bottom line is that while both may help improve the look of hardness to the muscles during contest preparations, only Masteron is actually going to offer a strong effect in muscle tissue itself. This means the potential for much more muscle size and strength gains during building phases of training, and at the very least a greater level of muscle preservation during cutting phases of training (the latter due to anabolic action in muscle helping to counter the catabolic effects of calorie restriction). These two drugs illustrate well the fact that categorizing the actions of steroids based on the three derivative bases (testosterone, nandrolone, and dihydrotestosterone) is not a highly accurate practice. So the next time someone tells you “This is a DHT derivative… so”, you can tell them “So what? I want to know what THIS steroid does, not DHT!”

Testosterone only cycles?

Q: I have two 10ml bottles of testosterone enanthate (200mg/ml). Is this enough for a cycle? I read that you should always use testosterone as a base, but that you need to stack it with other drugs too. How do you feel about a testosterone only cycle like this?

A: Two bottles of testosterone enanthate can certainly be enough for a cycle, especially if you are like most steroid users and take moderate doses for physique enhancement, and are not trying to win a major bodybuilding show. If it were I, I’d probably consider taking 400mg (2ml) per week for 10 weeks. This would be a nice length of time for good gains to accrue, and a sufficient dose of testosterone to support these gains. In general, I view testosterone as one of the safest and most effective anabolic/androgenic steroids. It seems to support all of the general actions required for mass gains. Testosterone possesses significant anabolic and androgenic activity, measurable anti-catabolic properties, and a moderate level of estrogenicity. All play their own role in supporting growth.

Testosterone is also not a c-17 methylated (alkylated) steroid, and is therefore readily broken down in the liver. This is a trait that allows it to also be far less stressful to serum lipids (HDL/LDL cholesterol) and hepatic enzymes than methylated steroids. Its moderate estrogenicity also helps to minimize the negative impacts on HDL/LDL cholesterol that can come with steroid administration. Studies have shown that in doses under 600mg per week, negative cholesterol alterations are noticed, but not “dramatic”. In many instances an individual can take 300-400mg of testosterone ester per week and not notice an HDL/LDL ratio shift outside of what is considered the normal range. Don’t get me wrong; there are always risks with steroid use, and even with these moderate doses of a mild drug you will still be shifting your cholesterol levels in a negative direction to some extent. If one is cautious, however, a testosterone-only cycle cannot only be effective, but it can be far safer than almost any multi-drug stack one might consider.

Hygetropin HGH – Is it Legit?

Q: What do you know about Hygetropin? It is Chinese GH, but I heard only GenSci Jintropin is legit GH from China. Is this stuff for real?

A: Good timing that you asked. We recently put together an article for Body of Science that looks at the issue of the new Chinese growth hormone products. For this piece we tested some raw powders that were acquired by a Dutch underground labs we have relations with, as well as a sample of Hygetropin. We were very curious to see if these new powders/products coming from China claiming to be somatropin were legit. After all, GeneScience (GenSci) is known to have the patent on the technology used to make somatropin. All other manufactures in the past were making only somatrem, the 192 amino acid variant known in the U.S. as Protropin. As it turns out, one of the main lab guys left GenSci recently, and has started producing bulk rHGH (191 AA somatropin) for a manufacturing facility. As you can guess, the products we tested turned out to be legit somatropin. Hygetropin is a legit product, at least the batch we tested. It was very pure. Given the very high cost for peptide analysis, I don’t have the resources to run samples through the lab very often. But in this case the money was well spent, and we were able to confirm that there are some new legitimate somatropin brands on the Chinese export market.

Ask William Llewellyn #4

About William Llewellyn

William Llewellyn is a recognized authority on anabolic substances, and author of the bestselling steroid reference book series ANABOLICS, soon entering its 6th edition with ANABOLICS 2007.  Llewellyn has been featured in ESPN Magazine (Cover Story), The Washington Post (Front Page Story), Discovery Channel, Fox News Channel, ESPN Television, NPR news, ESPN radio, and other television and radio programs. He also publishes Body of Science magazine, a quarterly publication dedicated to the “understanding of sports enhancement”, with a focus on the athletic use of performance-enhancing pharmaceuticals. Llewellyn also writes a monthly column for Muscular Development magazine on the subject of anabolic steroids, and has authored numerous articles for other bodybuilding publications.